Cargando…
Comparison of efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal procedure
Worldwide, prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common malignancy in males. We undertook a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with a transperitoneal (TLRP) approach, versus that of an extraperitoneal (ELRP) approach, for treatment...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4602188/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26458990 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep14442 |
_version_ | 1782394668530532352 |
---|---|
author | De Hong, Cao Liang Ren, Liu Qiang, Wei Jia, Wang Ying Chun, Hu Lu, Yang Zheng Hua, Liu Heng Ping, Li Shi Bing, Yan Yun Xiang, Li |
author_facet | De Hong, Cao Liang Ren, Liu Qiang, Wei Jia, Wang Ying Chun, Hu Lu, Yang Zheng Hua, Liu Heng Ping, Li Shi Bing, Yan Yun Xiang, Li |
author_sort | De Hong, Cao |
collection | PubMed |
description | Worldwide, prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common malignancy in males. We undertook a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with a transperitoneal (TLRP) approach, versus that of an extraperitoneal (ELRP) approach, for treatment of localized PCa. A comprehensive literature search retrieved 14 publications, with a total of 1715 patients. Meta-analysis of these studies showed that an ELRP approach was associated with a significantly shorter postoperative catheterization time (MD: 1.99; 95% CI: 0.52 to 3.54; P = 0.008), less blood transfusion rate (OR: 2.05; 95% CI: 1.03 to 4.06; P = 0.04), shorter intestinal function recovery time (MD: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.09; P < 0.0001) and shorter hospitalization days (MD: 2.71; 95% CI: 1.03 to 4.39; P = 0.002). In addition, our results showed no statistically significant differences between the two groups in operation time (MD: 19.39; 95% CI: −6.67 to 45.44; P = 0.014), intraoperative blood loss (MD: 4.89; 95% CI: −105.00 to 114.79; P = 0.93) and total complication rate (RR: 1.22; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.74; P = 0.27). In summary, our meta-analysis showed that ELRP is likely to be a safe and feasible alternative for localized PCa patients compared with TLRP. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4602188 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-46021882015-10-23 Comparison of efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal procedure De Hong, Cao Liang Ren, Liu Qiang, Wei Jia, Wang Ying Chun, Hu Lu, Yang Zheng Hua, Liu Heng Ping, Li Shi Bing, Yan Yun Xiang, Li Sci Rep Article Worldwide, prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common malignancy in males. We undertook a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with a transperitoneal (TLRP) approach, versus that of an extraperitoneal (ELRP) approach, for treatment of localized PCa. A comprehensive literature search retrieved 14 publications, with a total of 1715 patients. Meta-analysis of these studies showed that an ELRP approach was associated with a significantly shorter postoperative catheterization time (MD: 1.99; 95% CI: 0.52 to 3.54; P = 0.008), less blood transfusion rate (OR: 2.05; 95% CI: 1.03 to 4.06; P = 0.04), shorter intestinal function recovery time (MD: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.09; P < 0.0001) and shorter hospitalization days (MD: 2.71; 95% CI: 1.03 to 4.39; P = 0.002). In addition, our results showed no statistically significant differences between the two groups in operation time (MD: 19.39; 95% CI: −6.67 to 45.44; P = 0.014), intraoperative blood loss (MD: 4.89; 95% CI: −105.00 to 114.79; P = 0.93) and total complication rate (RR: 1.22; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.74; P = 0.27). In summary, our meta-analysis showed that ELRP is likely to be a safe and feasible alternative for localized PCa patients compared with TLRP. Nature Publishing Group 2015-10-13 /pmc/articles/PMC4602188/ /pubmed/26458990 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep14442 Text en Copyright © 2015, Macmillan Publishers Limited http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Article De Hong, Cao Liang Ren, Liu Qiang, Wei Jia, Wang Ying Chun, Hu Lu, Yang Zheng Hua, Liu Heng Ping, Li Shi Bing, Yan Yun Xiang, Li Comparison of efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal procedure |
title | Comparison of efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal procedure |
title_full | Comparison of efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal procedure |
title_fullStr | Comparison of efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal procedure |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal procedure |
title_short | Comparison of efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal procedure |
title_sort | comparison of efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal procedure |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4602188/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26458990 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep14442 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dehongcao comparisonofefficacyandsafetyofconventionallaparoscopicradicalprostatectomybythetransperitonealversusextraperitonealprocedure AT liangrenliu comparisonofefficacyandsafetyofconventionallaparoscopicradicalprostatectomybythetransperitonealversusextraperitonealprocedure AT qiangwei comparisonofefficacyandsafetyofconventionallaparoscopicradicalprostatectomybythetransperitonealversusextraperitonealprocedure AT jiawang comparisonofefficacyandsafetyofconventionallaparoscopicradicalprostatectomybythetransperitonealversusextraperitonealprocedure AT yingchunhu comparisonofefficacyandsafetyofconventionallaparoscopicradicalprostatectomybythetransperitonealversusextraperitonealprocedure AT luyang comparisonofefficacyandsafetyofconventionallaparoscopicradicalprostatectomybythetransperitonealversusextraperitonealprocedure AT zhenghualiu comparisonofefficacyandsafetyofconventionallaparoscopicradicalprostatectomybythetransperitonealversusextraperitonealprocedure AT hengpingli comparisonofefficacyandsafetyofconventionallaparoscopicradicalprostatectomybythetransperitonealversusextraperitonealprocedure AT shibingyan comparisonofefficacyandsafetyofconventionallaparoscopicradicalprostatectomybythetransperitonealversusextraperitonealprocedure AT yunxiangli comparisonofefficacyandsafetyofconventionallaparoscopicradicalprostatectomybythetransperitonealversusextraperitonealprocedure |